georgerussia

So you consider it is right to restrict others from doing things just because they do not fit your definition of "normal behavior"? If everyone was like you, we would not have opportunity to skydive - as the majority considers skydiving dangerous activity, which doesn't fit into "normal behavior" pattern as well. I have no idea why. One man and three woman can already legally live together as domestic partners. What's the problem of geting through the official ceremony? There might be some complications, but most of them are resolvable. In my opinion it is just typical hypocrisy of our society: pretend it does not happen. Well, the marriage must be consented - and there is no way to get consent from Harley :) * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Because there is no proof. Just words. Have you watched "The Matrix" movie? What exactly brought you to the conclusion that the Matrix does not exist? You have said that a Christian is not a Christian until he/she accepts Jesus as a savior. So I'm asking you how'd you know that the person has accepted Christ as savior? Just by his/her words? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

It looks like this is yet another bill sponsored by some crazy feminists, who alleges that "porn degrades women", and is immoral. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

There are two of them. Lynx was the first one, and Links was the successor. I still use Links sometime from console, as it does much better jobs with tables and frames. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

You mentioned "Takes less balls than fronting someone out face to face too", so I assume you're talking about backstabbing. They both are close unless you are taling about using sniper rifles. I would not agree unless you are talking about teenager who is good in shooting, and have spent a lot of time in rifle range in shooting moving targets. You just need to run zigzag, and his chances to shot you decrease dramatically. And if he running after you and shooting at the same time, the chance is close to zero. Anyway, if someone is going to kill a person, and the only way he can do it is to use a gun, he will not be stopped by a gun ban. If one is going to murder a person, it is already death penalty or life sentense, and it doesn't matter if you get 3 more years for illegally obtaining a gun. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

If you consider it THAT way, using a knife is much simpler. Just hit. And using poison still takes much less balls. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Not if you never used a gun before. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

I wonder why it ever happened. Just look on other countries like Russia, where guns have been banned for a very long time. Only hunting rifles were allowed, and obviously one cannot carry them. Did it affect murder rate? No. People were killing each others hundreds of years even before guns were invented. One does not need a gun to murder someone. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

But they are. Probably you're mixing your beliefs and religion. Whether your beliefs and science are mutually exclusive - it depends on what you believe in. But Christian religion and science in current stage are - because they object evolution, genetics, radiocarbon method... The biggest difference is that science is about evidence, not about beliefs. In religion if you believe in the only True God Christ, and I believe in the only True God Moffo, there is no way to test who is right. Obviously we cannot be both right, as there cannot be two Only True Gods. But none of us could prove their position with evidence, and therefore it is stuck forever. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Actually the introduce of supernatural, like everything else, should be based on evidence as well. So any talks about the invocations are premature until it is proven with evidence that a) That "supernatural" invoked does exist; b) He is able to sidestep the evidence. Until a) and b) is done, any claim like this is groundless. It's not even Occam razor, just basic logic. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Yes, they have. I don't know any religion which would teach you that all you need to do to accept the Christ is to say so. In every religion I know some actions are required, and in most cases your behaviour needs to be changed, as you are expected to follow some rules. And accepting Christ is treated as a way to be saved, and here you must follow even more rules. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

So how could you are believing in original documents which you have never seen and read? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Yes, I'm sure that there is enough people around the world know about the Bible, and have read it - not only Christians. Most atheists I know have read the entire Bible, and most have read different versions, and even compared them. And yes, my claim is correct, because I am not talking about "central message", and the claim is much broader. So basically you have no way to find who is Christian and who is not as soon as everyone says that they accepted Christ as their savior? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

There is the difference between science and religion. You do not have to believe in science - there is factual evidence which you can look on. But there is no factual evidence in religion. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

This is not true. What if the same web site is accessible through multiple domain names (uses virtual hosting by having multiple web sites on a single IP address), and only one of them ends up with .xxx? You block it if user accesses .xxx, but what if the same site is available through domain qweqwe.com? Or if user just types an IP address? This is not true as well. Like if software could be used illegally only by those who can hack it, there would be no piracy - the problem is that people share their hacks, allowing everyone to used an illegally obtained software. It is the same with the filters - technical savvy, who find ways to bypass them, publish those ways and at the end everyone knows how to do it. Correct. We already have standards to make the filters bullet-proof. The problem is that not everybody is compliant to those standards. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

But the devil is, as usual, in details. First, what is the correct way to accept Christ? Every religion has a different way, and for no religion I know it is just saying "I accept Christ". Second, accepting Christ is a requirement, but it is not the only requirement to be saved. You also have to follow specific behavior patterns, and again they are different in any religion - and sometime even contradicting. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

Well, the problem is that you cannot "dealt with" errors in the Bible without changing the Bible itself by using interpretations. I have mentioned problems with interpretation, but it looks like you ignored them completely. Are you trying to tell us that you can read Ancient Greek? That you have access to originals of the Bible? Or you just choose one of the available Bible interpretations, and believe it to be the original? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

No, it could not be. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

That's your post: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=2700132;so=ASC;sb=post_latest_reply;#2699285 And that's my reply: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=2700132;so=ASC;sb=post_latest_reply;#2700132 You'd find it in a few seconds if you just clicked on "In reply to" link at the top of a post several times :) * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

I said that more than two thousand years had passed since introduction of the Bible, but the people (around the world) still could not agree on what message it sends to us, and whether there is any message at all. Obviously I didn't mean Christians only, but you still replied that every Christian had agreed on central message in the Bible. That's the reason for this comment. That is the part of "could not agree on what message it sends to us, and whether there is any message at all". This includes both those who believe in the Bible, but disagree with you what is central message, and those who don't care because they are not sure if there is any message at all. It depends on your meaning of "acceptance of Christ". Would it be enough if someone just says that he accept Christ, and continues commiting sins and ignoring the church? Could I accept Christ, Allah, Buddha and a lot of other gods/deities - just in case? They do. But they are still different, and their beliefs are different. So if you are Catholic or Protestant, and follow those religions, you will NOT be saved according to Jehova's Witnesses teaching. And this clearly indicates that simple acceptance of Christ is not enough. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

I agree. And the problem with "moral issue" was that every right seemed to have a skeleton in his closet. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

But I'd bet more people would prefer Playboy :P * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

So far you haven't seen any harm for _anybody_ (including minority) from this regulation. I wonder why you didn't bash ban on smoking in planes then - just as a matter of record. No, I wouldn't say it is clear. Basically you should either allow any legal recruiter in school, or no recruiters. A lot of people have asked you whether police, fire fighters and street cleaner rectuiters should be allowed in school as well, but you didn't reply. No, people just talk that you are forced to do/not to do something not because there is any harm to others, but because _believes_ there is harm for others. And his believes are based on the old book full of contradictions. Not really, if you talk in general. For example, there are several countries, where the marriage is defined as a union of a man and one or more women. That's funny. Just look in 1959 in Virginia, and you'll find exactly the same story: "The act of marriage has for centuries been legally defined as the union of a man and woman of the same skin color". It was legally definedl the interracial marriage was illegal in 17 states, there were state laws, court decisions and punishment up to five(!) years in jail. And then certain parties would like to force everyone to accept that marriage now includes the union of man and woman of the same skin color. (that's your statement) Yes, it is misuse of the word "force". Nobody was forced to marry a person of different race after the interracial marriage ban had been repealed. Introducing this ban did force the people who wanted to do so, but removing this ban forced no one. It is the same here - just because people of the same sex could get married, does not mean that YOU have to marry a person of the same sex. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

That's because they do. We can skip the past, where you can easily find a whole lot of examples, starting from crusaders and heretics, and engind up with J.Bruno and Galilei). But take a look on modern times, and you'll still find a lot of examples. For example, all the arguments I've heard about gay marriage, premarital sex and pregnancy, condoms and birth protection were based on the Bible. Remember when the whole world was laughing on this stupid attempt to force Kansas children to study the groundless Bible-based "intelligent desing" theory? Remember 1959, when the JUDGE(!!!) said that "Almighty God created the races, white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents...."? * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

You can express your beliefs. However you must not force others to follow things you believe, unless you can prove it. I am talking about the whole world. First, you may be surprised, but there are people in this world who are not Christians. In fact, less than half of the world population is Christian (according to http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm, the number is 32%). So basically most of the world didn't get what the central message of the Bible is. Second, even between those Christians they still cannot agree on a lot of things - starting from very important things like "what to do and what not to do", where you end up after you die to the theological stuff like trinity-unitarianism, and what Jesus meant in that. Well, this is definitely not enough. Jehowa Witnesses agree on that as well, but probably it is the only thing they agree with Christians you mentioned. "Look like a light" and "is a light" are different things. As I said before, the water in my toilet bowl "looks like a light" as well. * Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *